First of all, I don't trust the doctors that do the peer reviews for the insurance company. They always seem to say the opposite of what my treating doctors and the designated doctor says.

I am basically in the process of getting a BRC set up because the word surgery popped up and now the insurance company is denying my ruptured disc and radiculopathy, and limiting my injury to a sprain after 8 months of paying for 2 ESI's and 24 sessions of physical therapy. The state designated doctor deemed all of my injuries compensable, but they are doing it anyway.

My concern is this. The peer review doctors differing opinions probably hurt my case, so if I appeal them and it gets sent to another one of the "non-biased" doctors and they write more rouge reviews, does that hurt my case more or build contrary evidence?

I got hit by a semi while driving a semi, surely I don't need more evidence to prove the injuries are not preexisting, right?